Nikon Coolpix P7800 real-world samples

Nikon's new Coolpix P7800 arrived in our Seattle office a few days ago and we've been doing our best to get as many sample images as possible on it, despite the unpredictable autumn weather. We've managed to create a small gallery of samples, taken in a range of different conditions to show off what the camera can do. There's more on the way, but for now, check out our gallery of pictures from Nikon's newest zoom compact flagship.

There are 32 images in our samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution.

I wish Nikon or one of the m43 companies would come out with a fixed zoom lens body using the Nikon 1" or DX sensor or m43 sensor with a 24-80 or so equivalent lens. Faster would be better, but at some point it can't be made compact or the lens IQ suffers.

If Nikon made a P7800 with a 1" sensor and a fixed 24-75 (or so) equivalent zoom lens that had very very good sharpness I'd be a buyer for sure as I like the features, layout and ergonomics of the P7800 very much.

If only Nikon had made it a 24-XX FX equivalent I'd be sold . . . perhaps the next iteration they will. In the mean time I'll keep using my LX7, which is fine, but it does not have an EVF nor an articulated screen.

I do have m43 gear (GH-2 and G5) which becomes more bulky and expensive once you add equivalent lenses to them.

Perhaps I'll pick one up in a year or so when the price comes down. Still waiting for a replacement of my dear old CP8400 - the P7800 came close except for being 28mm on the wide end . . .

I totally agree, and I'm also seeking a very-wide compact with articulating LCD (gee, thanks Canon for leaving that great feature out of your G# series updates).Considering this Nikon 'cause nothing else zooms as much an art. LCD. The pics I've examined are damn good for a small sensor. Wondering if it takes a filter adapter like the G-series.

Let's pray to the Mfr gods for the ultimate compact that makes our hearts soar and out pockets not empty.

Utterly amazing. You can get many a 4/3rds camera from Olympus or Panasonic, even a DSLR, for less than the Nikon 7800 or Canon G16. Instead, why doesn't Canon advance the G1X and let Nikon come up with something similar.

Although I wanted to like the P7800 because it is a Nikon with ADL, I think the Canon G16 samples are better, or maybe another set of samples is in order from dpreview to prove otherwise. The exposures are very inaccurate with half over or under exposed by half stop to 1 stop (off colours) but the other half looks okay. I will stay with my LX5 for now (more consistent exposures outdoors especially) and my wife's Coolpix. Canon G16 exposures were consistent.

For those wanting a m43, go for it. The point of these advanced compacts is the size with long zoom is much more compact and lightweight than m43 if it had the exact same long zoom range. Worth the money to many who buy for this reason.

You can get a DX DSLR BODY for the price of a P7800, but when you throw a lens or two in to get the equivalent focal length coverage you are at $1K or so. The DSLR system is also much bulkier in total. You'd have to buy a much older model DSLR and used glass to approach the P7800 new price.Wait a year and the P7800 will be a bit cheaper I'm sure.

Has anyone seen information regarding "what information is displayed in the digital viewfinder other than the image itself" was looking at the Fuji X20 with its digital overlay in the viewfinder. Also does anyone know if the write times have been improved over the P7700?

Any chance of a portrait without highlight clipping or overexposure? I am sure if the camera was metering off the face and not the dark jacket, likely the face would have been much better. A second photo of a portrait would have been best to do so we can examine the skin tones properly. Still have the camera for testing? Sorry to be bit picky, but Nikon cameras are usually much better for portraits. The DSLRs certainly are, and I have one of the small compacts Coolpix for my wife.

Other than that, the image quality looks very good for other subjects.

I use an Eye-Fi Mobi 8 gig card. The camera is busy and unusable for about 4 seconds after I take a shot when it's set for writing RAW+jpeg. It's not a high-performance card, but still.Even with a fast card, it's pretty slow. Go to the "Performance" section to get Dpreview's take:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-g15-nikon-p7700-shootout

How big and expensive would be a V1 or m4/3 body PLUS a 28-200mm equivalent F2.0-4.0 zoom lens with OIS ? So yes, there is definitely a market for these compacts IMHO...And the "average" photographer does not care about ILC and is seeking for a compact "all-in-one" camera usually...

Thank you for the samples. Very good overall sharpness, but...To get a better idea of the zoom IQ at tele end, why not choose a subject that is bright enough to be shot a lowest ISO (no noise), fastest aperture, which is flat enough so everything is within the DOF, with small details on every edges and corners, and is near enough so atmospheric turbulences and haze is not a problem ? It should not be that difficult...DSCN0138 was taken at 1600 ISO...DSCN0093 is a far subject with 2/3 of sky...

Ever seen raw images off of a D4 or MkIII? Flat, flat, flat. But full of data with possibilities. To compare untouched images to cheap cameras with balls-to-the-wall internal correction (*cough*Sony*cough*) means nothing.

People post “technically imperfect images” all the time. Including here at this website, and sometimes some of those technically imperfect images started out as raws.

jpegs remain a degraded version of what this camera can do. That’s why reading complaints about the image quality of this camera based upon jpegs is really tiresome.

Unless you’re wedded to only shooting jpeg, who cares about the image quality of what DPReview posted here?

Also things like exposure, tint, and saturation are often a matter of taste, and then given that computer monitors vary in quality widely you may not be seeing the same image that the originator posted–even if you download the whole jpeg.

Raws aren't exactly posted for viewing either, raws would be downloaded and then worked upon/extracted.

To listen to you, it is much better if people call the images "flat and colorless". Such the characteristics may kill brand new very nice product even before it goes to shelves. Huge part of potential buyers of that camera do not even know the difference between jpeg-raw, and they are correct, absolutely. They only see poorly performed images and read "FLAT, COLORLESS". Miss Dorothy will never buy it, simply like this, and she will be right. You, guys, should think twice, before posting anything here, poorly made images or critics. Or take responsibility on yourself, do not put it on any manufacturer, Nikon in this case. Very good pristine images must be posted, not demagogue!

All I was saying is that jpegs usually are that way. And why bother to even look at jpegs from a camera which can shoot raw? Unless of course you only shoot jpeg.

No one serious about cameras like this one, say the Canon G16, is going to make image quality judgements based on jpegs.

I understand why DPReview didn’t post raws for download; ACR doesn’t extract these Nikon raws yet. And I don’t particularly care that DPReview posted some jpegs to look at. Jpegs aren’t things I look at when trying to find out about cameras like this one.

I’ve not looked at all of these jpegs, but they mostly look good on my monitor, but my monitor is extraordinary.

This camera is targeted for segment of the market which populated with buyers who do not know what does it mean jpeg or raw and why they need spend time to improve the image. They simply do not need any raws and supporting programs, accordingly. They need nice reliable camera right now, without any extra trouble. They are doctors, lawyers, mothers of families, drivers, so on and on. They DO NOT need RAWs. They are not pros, like you and me. That's why any new tested camera MUST be advertised with max even possible quality of the images, not clear garbage, to turn a good idea into its opposite. BTW, I am not working for Nikon, never did. I am old pro for 55 years, from darkroom and Toyo 8x10, to D4/D800 and Hassy with digibacks.

I would accept something there, but most of the images are overexposed and such situation is working against its main goal - to show how good is brand new product. So far people saying - flat, colorless images - because of unforgivable operators overlooking or direct mistakes. Keep in mind, nobody from potential buyers has "retina", very few - maybe!

So I got some ISO 1600 raws, extracted them to 8bit tiffs with View NX2.

They seemed fine, with room to play with saturation and exposure, when ACR finally extracts them.

The problem would appear to be that the Nikon P7800's lens isn't as optically good as it should be. PanaLeica, Fuji, Samsung, Olympus all have better lenses on the direct competition--LX7, X20, EX2F, XZ2.

Image quality looks almost exactly the same as the P7700..not that that's a bad thing. But I guess if you can do without the viewfinder, you can save yourself almost $300 and get the same level of imaging performance with the P7700.

Very nice camera, nice samples. Now the american Amazon retail price new is 546.95 usd, whereas on Amazon germany and france it sells for euros 561. At today conversion rate ( 1.35 dollar for 1 euro ), that puts the" european" 7800 at 757,35 usd equivalent. Given all the talk about free trade and fair treatment to all nations, anyone can explain to me this discrepancy ? Assuming some kind of adjustment for whatever economic/standard of living reason, let's say a 1.15 conversion rate to be nice, that's still 15% more than US retail price. What are we european customers ? Idiots to be milked dry by austerity measures while our american counterparts continue enjoying better prices for the same goods paid with paper printed at will by the FED ?

Well you can always live in America, with American labour laws, health care, unemployment and social care benefits. You'll have more money in your pocket and cheaper cameras until something goes wrong in your life and then...Otherwise you'll pay VAT, higher overheads for shop workers, the retailer and distributor, higher fuel prices for delivery etc etc. and have to pay more for your latest gadget.

Keep in mind that the Amazon US pricing excludes sales tax while in the European Amazon stores VAT, MWSt etc is included. There's still a difference but it is not quite as big. Also, you have much better warranty in Europe which also has to be worth something.

Yea, but, how would you like to pay $300,000 for life-saving medical care without insurance... even with insurance, you are going to dig into your savings. Now, do you want your children to go to school as well ....

Yeah, blame America. I don't know exactly where in Europe you are from - probably one of the countries with low work-ethic and high showmanship - but Americans are not the geniuses who encouraged disparate economies to join together in a currency union. In fact, responsible Americans discouraged it from the beginning. We also have fewer tariffs on foreign goods than Europe. And the US is not the only country running its printing presses 24/7/365.

Here in Bulgaria (we are also part of the EU) we have almost no free health care, 1 hour lunch, 20 days vacation per year and 600 euro salary per month (which is one of the relatively good salaries) and guess what, the price of the cameras are the same like everywhere in Europe. So stop make yourself some kind of a victims.

To Olymore - you, guys, there in Europe, used to drink coffee from 11 to 3, everyday, what I've seen with my own eyes. Germany is working hard to cover your coffee. Nobody is covering anything for me in the NYC, and I working everyday in my 70, to get something over my pension. The same do a lot of my old friends, who is not after stroke or heart attack. If you are from GB, it is not for you, but anyway, you know...

One more portrait would be nice and actually necessary for a better understanding. Very impressive outcome for a small sensor though! And the lens is very good but at its extreme sides. I feel Nikon has worked hard to make its best here, iq wise.

Some of the shots look a little flat, and colors a little too cool for my taste.

Still, the sensor/lens combination gives good noise performance and is nice and sharp. Shot 18/25 with the plant in front of the brick shows good sharpness across the frame. True, its an ideal situation with base ISO, stopped down in good light, but it shows what the camera can do.

The images show an amazing amount of detail for such a small sensor camera. No doubt in large part due to the excellent Nikkor lens in the P7800 and excellent noise handling that retains detail as well. This is about as good as it gets for a camera with a tiny sensor!

The only problem with Nikon nowadays are the skin tones..they are ugly...many of the new cameras have an orange color. If you go to shuttebug reviews and see all brands, nikon has one of the worst skin tones ever. They shoot the same girls with every different camera...

Don't agree. My Nikons (D3, D3x, D200, D 5100) produce just perfekt skin tones ooc. Very natural and not that reddish you often see from other brands. Of course, to know your camera helps to get good results. Proper in camera tonal curve settings are importan likewise using NX2 when shooting RAW.

Many samples from the new ones do have an orange cast...my old D300 is better, i also agree.there were many complaints about the D7000 and if you type orange skin tones nikon on google you will get plenty of resuts..d5200:http://www.shutterbug.com/content/nikon-d5200-lab-test-results-amp-commentsof course is a matter of taste...some like this kind of color...i like fuji skin tones very much ( but dont own any fuji mirrorless camera or dsrl)

If you shoot raw and run the Nikon photos through Lightroom and apply Portrait mode preset, the skin tone colours always look lovely to the eye or select any of the other presets in LR for shade, cloudy or daylight. Works very well. Something I would do for a DSLR file, but for an advanced compact, most may choose to shoot in jpeg only or the occasional raw. If one wants the best you can get from a raw file (because higher IQ matters) likely they are using a larger sensor camera to start. Works well in LR for my D700 and D300.

Starting October 1st, Getty Images will no longer accept images in which the models have been Photoshopped to "look thinner or larger." The change was made due to a French law that requires disclosure of such images.

A court ruling our of Newton, Massachusetts has set an important legal precedent for drone pilots: federal drone laws will now trump local drone regulations in situations where the two are in conflict.

macOS High Sierra came out today, but if you use a Wacom tablet you need to wait a few weeks before you upgrade. According to Wacom, they won't have a compatible driver ready for you until "late October."

Vitec, the company that owns popular accessory maker Manfrotto, has just acquired JOBY and Lowepro for a cool $10.3 million in cash. The acquisition adds JOBY and Lowepro to Vitec's already sizable collection of camera gear brands.

A veteran photojournalist, Rick Wilking secured a spot in the path of totality for the August solar eclipse. While things didn't quite pan out as predicted, an unexpected subject in the sky and a quick reaction made for a once-in-a-lifetime shot.